Judges Need Not Know All Laws
What is required of judges, so say the greatest of them, are two qualities. Honesty and courage. A good judge will ask all the right questions; a good advocate will point out the right answers from the statutes. He will present, to the judge, previously decided cases, notings from the legislative exercise that led to the law, and, above all, the repercussions on future problems, should the order not be passed in his favour.
In an LLM (Master of Laws) class that this author was attending, students insisted that every judge should know every law. Being the sole opponent of that view was not an enviable position. Yet, the best of jurists have declared that it is not necessary for all judges to know all the laws. It is the duty of the contesting advocates to highlight their stand as effectively as debunking that of the opposition.
What is required of judges, so say the greatest of them, are two qualities. Honesty and courage. A good judge will ask all the right questions; a good advocate will point out the right answers from the statutes. He will present, to the judge, previously decided cases, notings from the legislative exercise that led to the law, and, above all, the repercussions on future problems, should the order not be passed in his favour.
A magistrate passed an order releasing an impounded passport. He had heard arguments in favour of such an order. He felt convinced and said so. The next day, he had doubts, nagging doubts. What was the argument that swung the case? Did the magistrate get the gist right? Can he placate his conscience?
